Remember me
▼ Content

East Antarctic Ice Shelf Weaknesses



Page 5 of 6<<<3456>
20-11-2017 19:44
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
[b]Wake wrote: icebergs to calf from ice shelves.
AGW denier liar whiners said that the cracks that formed on the Larsen C Ice Shelf would..... heal. There was a 1000 billion+ ton "healing" in July.
23-11-2017 18:20
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
Altho delayed from last year's departure from the "norm", to date, 2017
global sea ice is well LESS now.
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2136.0;attach=55232;image
Edited on 23-11-2017 18:44
05-12-2017 10:52
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
In July the long anticipated undocking of the million million ton Larsen Ice Berg occurred. After ~ 2.5 months, another large iceberg undocked from the Pine Island Glacier. Initially, the PIG iceberg remained near its calving region, remaining intact, probably due to thick pack ice. As of now tho, the iceberg has rapidly broken up:
https://phys.org/news/2017-12-giant-west-antarctic-iceberg-disintegrates.html
Edited on 05-12-2017 10:57
17-12-2017 04:37
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
Scientists are eager to explore the new leading edge of the Larsen C ice shelf after the Larsen C Ice Berg undocked from Antarctica.... at least scientists from places other than the U.S. We'll see in the weeks & months ahead how effectively "don'T rump" & his lackey boys have crushed U.S. Antarctic science & U.S. science in general.
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/larsen-c-ice-shelf-top-science-stories-2017-yir
Edited on 17-12-2017 04:38
11-01-2018 17:40
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
Increasing numbers of robots will explore Antarctic Ice Shelves from underneath: https://futurism.com/research-drones-dive-ice-antarctica/
Edited on 11-01-2018 17:45
28-01-2018 16:50
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
https://twitter.com/kryosat/status/946682824463183872/photo/1

Forming 6+trillion ton Antarctic Iceberg A68, after breaking at its remaining south connection to Larsen C Ice Shelf, A68 slowly translated east, pushing against restraining sea ice. After clearing the southern connection, A68 is moving to the south.
28-01-2018 21:30
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
litesong wrote:
https://twitter.com/kryosat/status/946682824463183872/photo/1

Forming 6+trillion ton Antarctic Iceberg A68, after breaking at its remaining south connection to Larsen C Ice Shelf, A68 slowly translated east, pushing against restraining sea ice. After clearing the southern connection, A68 is moving to the south.


Litesong,
Could you please avoid posting actual information in the future please ?
All A68 might be is the damage done by chlorine-bromine based gases which allows for the ozone hole.
It is known that this causes wind patterns to change
But I don't think that may made gases causing environmental change is anything to worry.
For all we next will be the Gulf Stream turning south before it reaches England. That might sound like a bad thing but it's not. Switzerland and Austria have done for themselves having a cooler climate. :-)
29-01-2018 00:29
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
https://twitter.com/kryosat/status/946682824463183872/photo/1
Forming 6+trillion ton Antarctic Iceberg A68, after breaking at its remaining south connection to Larsen C Ice Shelf, A68 slowly translated east, pushing against restraining sea ice. After clearing the southern connection, A68 is moving to the south.... maybe southeast.
Litesong,
....avoid posting actual information......A68 might be is the damage done by chlorine-bromine based gases....
Ah..... james thinks anything posted that doesn't agree with its made-up non- (sigh-ants) is non- sense. james demonstrates an AGW denier liar whinerism to its arrogant ... un-best.
Edited on 29-01-2018 00:30
29-01-2018 01:03
Wake
★★★★★
(3396)
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
https://twitter.com/kryosat/status/946682824463183872/photo/1

Forming 6+trillion ton Antarctic Iceberg A68, after breaking at its remaining south connection to Larsen C Ice Shelf, A68 slowly translated east, pushing against restraining sea ice. After clearing the southern connection, A68 is moving to the south.


Litesong,
Could you please avoid posting actual information in the future please ?
All A68 might be is the damage done by chlorine-bromine based gases which allows for the ozone hole.
It is known that this causes wind patterns to change
But I don't think that may made gases causing environmental change is anything to worry.
For all we next will be the Gulf Stream turning south before it reaches England. That might sound like a bad thing but it's not. Switzerland and Austria have done for themselves having a cooler climate. :-)


James - do you see what happens when you try to use sarcasm to an idiot? If you held it up in front of him and pointed out what you just posted in detail he still wouldn't get it.
29-01-2018 01:44
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
https://twitter.com/kryosat/status/946682824463183872/photo/1

Forming 6+trillion ton Antarctic Iceberg A68, after breaking at its remaining south connection to Larsen C Ice Shelf, A68 slowly translated east, pushing against restraining sea ice. After clearing the southern connection, A68 is moving to the south.


Litesong,
Could you please avoid posting actual information in the future please ?
All A68 might be is the damage done by chlorine-bromine based gases which allows for the ozone hole.
It is known that this causes wind patterns to change
But I don't think that may made gases causing environmental change is anything to worry.
For all we next will be the Gulf Stream turning south before it reaches England. That might sound like a bad thing but it's not. Switzerland and Austria have done for themselves having a cooler climate. :-)


James - do you see what happens when you try to use sarcasm to an idiot? If you held it up in front of him and pointed out what you just posted in detail he still wouldn't get it.


Wake,
I think litesong is intelligent enough to understand what I was saying. If I wanted to gain credibility with you and ITN I would need to say the Sun rises in the West and sets in the East. I think litesong is aware that most like chemicals released into the atmosphere are responsible for that. It seems that only you missed it.
And this is where I find you tiring Wake. You came after me because I have medical problems and even went so low as to your being right because you're a manic depressive with suicidal tendencies.
It's when people know the facts then they know that when you discredit someone you are also discrediting the science that that person is willing to consider.
29-01-2018 01:55
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1042)
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
https://twitter.com/kryosat/status/946682824463183872/photo/1

Forming 6+trillion ton Antarctic Iceberg A68, after breaking at its remaining south connection to Larsen C Ice Shelf, A68 slowly translated east, pushing against restraining sea ice. After clearing the southern connection, A68 is moving to the south.


Litesong,
Could you please avoid posting actual information in the future please ?
All A68 might be is the damage done by chlorine-bromine based gases which allows for the ozone hole.
It is known that this causes wind patterns to change
But I don't think that may made gases causing environmental change is anything to worry.
For all we next will be the Gulf Stream turning south before it reaches England. That might sound like a bad thing but it's not. Switzerland and Austria have done for themselves having a cooler climate. :-)


James - do you see what happens when you try to use sarcasm to an idiot? If you held it up in front of him and pointed out what you just posted in detail he still wouldn't get it.


Wake,
I think litesong is intelligent enough.........


James,
In all my life I have never see someone insult them self so brutally with so few words as you have done to yourself here.
29-01-2018 15:37
Wake
★★★★★
(3396)
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
https://twitter.com/kryosat/status/946682824463183872/photo/1

Forming 6+trillion ton Antarctic Iceberg A68, after breaking at its remaining south connection to Larsen C Ice Shelf, A68 slowly translated east, pushing against restraining sea ice. After clearing the southern connection, A68 is moving to the south.


Litesong,
Could you please avoid posting actual information in the future please ?
All A68 might be is the damage done by chlorine-bromine based gases which allows for the ozone hole.
It is known that this causes wind patterns to change
But I don't think that may made gases causing environmental change is anything to worry.
For all we next will be the Gulf Stream turning south before it reaches England. That might sound like a bad thing but it's not. Switzerland and Austria have done for themselves having a cooler climate. :-)


James - do you see what happens when you try to use sarcasm to an idiot? If you held it up in front of him and pointed out what you just posted in detail he still wouldn't get it.


Wake,
I think litesong is intelligent enough to understand what I was saying. If I wanted to gain credibility with you and ITN I would need to say the Sun rises in the West and sets in the East. I think litesong is aware that most like chemicals released into the atmosphere are responsible for that. It seems that only you missed it.
And this is where I find you tiring Wake. You came after me because I have medical problems and even went so low as to your being right because you're a manic depressive with suicidal tendencies.
It's when people know the facts then they know that when you discredit someone you are also discrediting the science that that person is willing to consider.



Most of the chemicals released into the atmosphere causes the Sun to rise in the west and set in the east? If you don't actually know what chemicals are released why would you invent theories that explain events that don't occur?
01-02-2018 00:42
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
https://twitter.com/kryosat/status/946682824463183872/photo/1

Forming 6+trillion ton Antarctic Iceberg A68, after breaking at its remaining south connection to Larsen C Ice Shelf, A68 slowly translated east, pushing against restraining sea ice. After clearing the southern connection, A68 is moving to the south.


Litesong,
Could you please avoid posting actual information in the future please ?
All A68 might be is the damage done by chlorine-bromine based gases which allows for the ozone hole.
It is known that this causes wind patterns to change
But I don't think that may made gases causing environmental change is anything to worry.
For all we next will be the Gulf Stream turning south before it reaches England. That might sound like a bad thing but it's not. Switzerland and Austria have done for themselves having a cooler climate. :-)


James - do you see what happens when you try to use sarcasm to an idiot? If you held it up in front of him and pointed out what you just posted in detail he still wouldn't get it.


Wake,
I think litesong is intelligent enough to understand what I was saying. If I wanted to gain credibility with you and ITN I would need to say the Sun rises in the West and sets in the East. I think litesong is aware that most like chemicals released into the atmosphere are responsible for that. It seems that only you missed it.
And this is where I find you tiring Wake. You came after me because I have medical problems and even went so low as to your being right because you're a manic depressive with suicidal tendencies.
It's when people know the facts then they know that when you discredit someone you are also discrediting the science that that person is willing to consider.



Most of the chemicals released into the atmosphere causes the Sun to rise in the west and set in the east? If you don't actually know what chemicals are released why would you invent theories that explain events that don't occur?



Wake,
I am quite familiar with why there is a hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica and it's effects. It'd be a waste of time trying to explain it to you. And I noticed that my saying the Sun rises in the west and sets the east didn't bring the usual garbage for you and ITN because it's an obviously wrong statement.
From my perspective if the 2 of you can discredit an indivisual then you consider that you are also discrediting the science the are discussing.
When ITN states "Inversion Fallacy" then what he is saying is that he has decided that the science a person is asking to be consider is actually fraudulent work. And yet he does not see the need to explain his opinion.
IMO both of you consistently misrepresent how well you understand science. And as far as litesong goes, I think a lot of "their" concerns are reasonable ones.
01-02-2018 01:23
Wake
★★★★★
(3396)
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
https://twitter.com/kryosat/status/946682824463183872/photo/1

Forming 6+trillion ton Antarctic Iceberg A68, after breaking at its remaining south connection to Larsen C Ice Shelf, A68 slowly translated east, pushing against restraining sea ice. After clearing the southern connection, A68 is moving to the south.


Litesong,
Could you please avoid posting actual information in the future please ?
All A68 might be is the damage done by chlorine-bromine based gases which allows for the ozone hole.
It is known that this causes wind patterns to change
But I don't think that may made gases causing environmental change is anything to worry.
For all we next will be the Gulf Stream turning south before it reaches England. That might sound like a bad thing but it's not. Switzerland and Austria have done for themselves having a cooler climate. :-)


James - do you see what happens when you try to use sarcasm to an idiot? If you held it up in front of him and pointed out what you just posted in detail he still wouldn't get it.


Wake,
I think litesong is intelligent enough to understand what I was saying. If I wanted to gain credibility with you and ITN I would need to say the Sun rises in the West and sets in the East. I think litesong is aware that most like chemicals released into the atmosphere are responsible for that. It seems that only you missed it.
And this is where I find you tiring Wake. You came after me because I have medical problems and even went so low as to your being right because you're a manic depressive with suicidal tendencies.
It's when people know the facts then they know that when you discredit someone you are also discrediting the science that that person is willing to consider.



Most of the chemicals released into the atmosphere causes the Sun to rise in the west and set in the east? If you don't actually know what chemicals are released why would you invent theories that explain events that don't occur?



Wake,
I am quite familiar with why there is a hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica and it's effects. It'd be a waste of time trying to explain it to you. And I noticed that my saying the Sun rises in the west and sets the east didn't bring the usual garbage for you and ITN because it's an obviously wrong statement.
From my perspective if the 2 of you can discredit an indivisual then you consider that you are also discrediting the science the are discussing.
When ITN states "Inversion Fallacy" then what he is saying is that he has decided that the science a person is asking to be consider is actually fraudulent work. And yet he does not see the need to explain his opinion.
IMO both of you consistently misrepresent how well you understand science. And as far as litesong goes, I think a lot of "their" concerns are reasonable ones.


James - I have explained the Milankovich cycles to you and how there is presently a tilt to the Earth in regards to the North Pole which means that there is less sunlight falling on the southern end of the southern hemisphere. This is why the O3 is less there and this is also why we hear all the crying of destroying the Ozone layer.
01-02-2018 02:41
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5733)
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
https://twitter.com/kryosat/status/946682824463183872/photo/1

Forming 6+trillion ton Antarctic Iceberg A68, after breaking at its remaining south connection to Larsen C Ice Shelf, A68 slowly translated east, pushing against restraining sea ice. After clearing the southern connection, A68 is moving to the south.


Litesong,
Could you please avoid posting actual information in the future please ?
All A68 might be is the damage done by chlorine-bromine based gases which allows for the ozone hole.
It is known that this causes wind patterns to change
But I don't think that may made gases causing environmental change is anything to worry.
For all we next will be the Gulf Stream turning south before it reaches England. That might sound like a bad thing but it's not. Switzerland and Austria have done for themselves having a cooler climate. :-)


James - do you see what happens when you try to use sarcasm to an idiot? If you held it up in front of him and pointed out what you just posted in detail he still wouldn't get it.


Wake,
I think litesong is intelligent enough to understand what I was saying. If I wanted to gain credibility with you and ITN I would need to say the Sun rises in the West and sets in the East. I think litesong is aware that most like chemicals released into the atmosphere are responsible for that. It seems that only you missed it.
And this is where I find you tiring Wake. You came after me because I have medical problems and even went so low as to your being right because you're a manic depressive with suicidal tendencies.
It's when people know the facts then they know that when you discredit someone you are also discrediting the science that that person is willing to consider.



Most of the chemicals released into the atmosphere causes the Sun to rise in the west and set in the east? If you don't actually know what chemicals are released why would you invent theories that explain events that don't occur?



Wake,
I am quite familiar with why there is a hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica

Actually, you aren't. You fell in the old belief that chlorine or bromine destroys the ozone layer.

Neither chemical does.

Initially, such things as CFC's were blamed on the 'destruction' of ozone. The problem with that, is that if you put something like R-12 refrigerant in a tank of ozone, nothing happens. The ozone isn't destroyed.

Then the argument that CFC's break up in sunlight and send free chlorine (or bromine for some other chemicals blamed for ozone) into the ozone layer. The problem with that is simply that free chlorine (or bromine) is VERY reactive. It will react with something else long before it gets anywhere more than a few dozen feet.

If these gases destroyed ozone, the ozone hole should over the industrialized nations, not lonely places like a pole.

The entire ozone layer 'problem' completely denies the Chapman cycle, and the reason there is a temperature inversion in the stratosphere.

The Sun puts out a wide band of frequencies of light, including UV light, which we designate into three sub-bands, called UV-A, UV-B, and UV-C, with UV-C being the highest frequency.

As this light enters an atmosphere containing oxygen and ozone, some of it is absorbed. UV-C is absorbed by causing the destruction of ozone by decomposition into oxygen. This happens at the stop of the stratosphere. This is an exothermic reaction, causing that part of the stratosphere to be warm. All of the UV-C is blocked by this action (thankfully!).

Lower down, UV-B light will cause the reverse reaction with oxygen. When absorbed by oxygen, it will form ozone. This is an endothermic reaction, which cools the air around it, causing the bottom of the stratosphere (and formation of the tropopause) to be cold. Most of the UV-B light is absorbed by this action (thankfully!).

The small amount of UV-B and the UV-A light reaches the surface. That causes chemical reactions in our skin to align melanin to shield the nucleus in the cells in the skin. This produces the tanning that we see in skin. Some UV-B also gets through, which will penetrate the melanin and damage the cell anyway. Also, before the cell gets aligned to the light, damage to the cell can occur from UV-A. The sunburn occurs.

Ozone is built up each day and decays away somewhat each night. Ozone is also an unstable molecule. It will decompose into oxygen by itself, given time.

In other words, as long as you have sunlight and oxygen, you WILL have ozone. We can't destroy the ozone layer even if we wanted to.

The reason there is a hole at the south pole during summer is because the poles are not only land of the midnight sun, but also the land of the noontime DARK. It's wintertime in Antarctica during our summers here. No Sun...no UV...no ozone production. No UV light to harm anyone, so...who cares?

The hole varies in size depending on the upper air winds.

James_ wrote:
and it's effects.

The effects of the ozone hole is nothing. It forms, we see that it forms, so big hairy deal. It does not change the winds. It does not change the temperature. It does not change the content of carbon dioxide in the air near there. It doesn't really do ANYTHING that NASA claims it does. NASA's statements here on made for political reasons.

James_ wrote:
It'd be a waste of time trying to explain it to you.

It certainly wasn't a waste of time to explain it to YOU. Your vague claim of complexity is weak.
James_ wrote:
And I noticed that my saying the Sun rises in the west and sets the east didn't bring the usual garbage for you and ITN because it's an obviously wrong statement.

No, we are just used to you making wrong statements.
James_ wrote:
From my perspective if the 2 of you can discredit an indivisual then you consider that you are also discrediting the science the are discussing.

You are not discussing science.
James_ wrote:
When ITN states "Inversion Fallacy" then what he is saying is that he has decided that the science a person is asking to be consider is actually fraudulent work.

WRONG. An inversion fallacy is a real fallacy. A fallacy is logic error, similar to a mathematical error in mathematics. Logic is a closed system, like mathematics.

An inversion fallacy is taking someone's argument and inverting it's context. It is a fallacy, since is ignores the predicate and conclusion of the original argument. Like all fallacies, it is not an argument.
James_ wrote:
And yet he does not see the need to explain his opinion.

Not an opinion. A logic error. Logic is a closed system, just like mathematics is. Like mathematics, it has the power of the formal proof, and the power of prediction. The axioms that define the rules of logic are fixed, just like they are in a Domain of mathematics.
James_ wrote:
IMO both of you consistently misrepresent how well you understand science.

It is YOU that denies science, dude. It is YOU that denied the Chapman cycle just now.
James_ wrote:
And as far as litesong goes, I think a lot of "their" concerns are reasonable ones.

Litebeer is in his own world of quoting random numbers as data. Nothing will deflect him from that course any more than a piece of driftwood will stop a supertanker.


The Parrot Killer
01-02-2018 03:02
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5733)
Wake wrote:
James - I have explained the Milankovich cycles to you and how there is presently a tilt to the Earth in regards to the North Pole

There is no tilt to the North pole. The North pole is the same place it always has been. I believe you are referring the tilt of Earth's axis against the solar ecliptic.
Wake wrote:
which means that there is less sunlight falling on the southern end of the southern hemisphere.

Generallly the same amount of sunlight falls on both hemispheres. The only difference between them is WHEN that sunlight is prevalent on one hemisphere or the other. We call that prevalence the seasons.

There IS a slight difference due to the elliptical nature of Earth's orbit, but it is not particularly significant for ozone production.
Wake wrote:
This is why the O3 is less there

There isn't. Ozone is the same no matter which hemisphere you are on (seasonal average). Did you know that BOTH poles show a hole? That's right! There's one in the Arctic too!

Now it is YOU that is denying the Chapman cycle.

Wake wrote:
and this is also why we hear all the crying of destroying the Ozone layer.

WRONG. We hear all the crying and whining of destroying the ozone layer (not capitalized) because government was bribed to maintain the monopoly of DuPont. Monopolies can ONLY be maintained by the use of government.

Left to themselves, they will fall apart.

The problem with being the fastest gun is that there is always some little bastard that comes along and shoots your kneecaps off. The problem with being the monopoly is that there is always some little startup that comes along and out maneuvers large dinosaurs like that in the market.

The way Microsoft and Apple did to IBM. The way Unix did to the Microsoft server market. The way Sony, LG, and others blew Microsoft out of the cell phone market.

Only with government help can a monopoly survive as a monopoly.

DuPont was losing it's patents on R-12. They wanted governments to pass laws to force the use of R134a, which IS patented by DuPont. R-12 is THE chloro-fluocarbon that was targeted. It was used not just as a refrigerant, but also as a cheap, safe, inert, and powerful propellant in spray cans.

There is nothing wrong with R-12. You can put it in a tank of ozone and nothing happens.

The EPA used the ozone 'crisis' to justify and expand grand new powers (and money) for the EPA.

There is no ozone crisis. There never was. We couldn't destroy the ozone layer even if we wanted to. As long as you have sunlight and oxygen, you WILL have ozone.


The Parrot Killer
01-02-2018 23:05
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Into the Night wrote:
.


ITN,
I deleted all off your comments that we're nonsensical.
non·sen·si·cal
ˌnänˈsensək(ə)l/
adjective

ridiculously impractical or ill-advised

It is kind of sad in a way. If either you or Wake found how our atmosphere works then a discussion of how and why the Arctic and the Antarctic are different could have been interesting.
Edited on 01-02-2018 23:08
02-02-2018 00:08
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5733)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
.

It is kind of sad in a way. If either you or Wake found how our atmosphere works then a discussion of how and why the Arctic and the Antarctic are different could have been interesting.


There is really very few differences between the poles.

The Arctic is magnetized as a south magnet, while the Antarctic is generally magnetized as a north magnet (which is why our compasses around here point toward the Arctic, although not at the geographic pole).

The Arctic pole is sea. The Antarctic pole is land.

Both poles have auroras centered around the magnetic pole, not the geographic one. Both poles see days where the Sun never sets, and also where the Sun never rises. Both poles have ozone 'holes'. They are natural feature of the geographic poles. They are not caused by CFC's, Both poles are cold. Antarctica is a bit colder because of the dry nature of being land. Antarctica is really a desert. Both poles have a prevalent high pressure system over them most of the time (the polar high).


The Parrot Killer
02-02-2018 17:17
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Both poles are cold. Antarctica is a bit colder because of the dry nature of being land.
Antarctica average elevation is 8200 feet. That is the main reason that Antarctica is colder than the Arctic.
Cute Antarctic stats:
1) If all the ice were removed from Antarctica (& before rebound), average Antarctic elevation would be ~ 1200-1300 feet, broken up into an Antarctic archipelago.
2) The weight of ices depresses much Antarctic land below sea level, with the deepest ices resting on submerged land.... OVER 8300 feet BELOW SEA LEVEL!
02-02-2018 17:19
Wake
★★★★★
(3396)
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Both poles are cold. Antarctica is a bit colder because of the dry nature of being land.
Antarctica average elevation is 8200 feet. That is the main reason that Antarctica is colder than the Arctic.
Cute Antarctic stats:
1) If all the ice were removed from Antarctica (& before rebound), average Antarctic elevation would be ~ 1200-1300 feet, broken up into an Antarctic archipelago.
2) The weight of ices depresses much Antarctic land below sea level, with the deepest ices resting on submerged land.... OVER 8300 feet BELOW SEA LEVEL!


And if the color green were really red the trees would all look different.
02-02-2018 23:46
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Both poles are cold. Antarctica is a bit colder because of the dry nature of being land.
Antarctica average elevation is 8200 feet. That is the main reason that Antarctica is colder than the Arctic.
Cute Antarctic stats:
1) If all the ice were removed from Antarctica (& before rebound), average Antarctic elevation would be ~ 1200-1300 feet, broken up into an Antarctic archipelago.
2) The weight of ices depresses much Antarctic land below sea level, with the deepest ices resting on submerged land.... OVER 8300 feet BELOW SEA LEVEL!

[url]https://www.livescience.com/38765-ozone-hole-global-warming.html
[/url]
03-02-2018 02:12
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5733)
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Both poles are cold. Antarctica is a bit colder because of the dry nature of being land.
Antarctica average elevation is 8200 feet. That is the main reason that Antarctica is colder than the Arctic.
Cute Antarctic stats:
1) If all the ice were removed from Antarctica (& before rebound), average Antarctic elevation would be ~ 1200-1300 feet, broken up into an Antarctic archipelago.
2) The weight of ices depresses much Antarctic land below sea level, with the deepest ices resting on submerged land.... OVER 8300 feet BELOW SEA LEVEL!

...deleted Holy Link...


Ozone holes are a natural phenomenon at the Earth's poles. They vary in size because of the variances in the upper air winds. The clouds that move around the prevalent high pressure area at the poles vary by that same thing. The ozone hole does not create or destroy clouds, and does not cause clouds to move.

While the temperature inversion of the stratosphere is caused by ozone production and destruction, it does not warm the Earth.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 03-02-2018 02:13
03-02-2018 02:19
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Both poles are cold. Antarctica is a bit colder because of the dry nature of being land.
Antarctica average elevation is 8200 feet. That is the main reason that Antarctica is colder than the Arctic.
Cute Antarctic stats:
1) If all the ice were removed from Antarctica (& before rebound), average Antarctic elevation would be ~ 1200-1300 feet, broken up into an Antarctic archipelago.
2) The weight of ices depresses much Antarctic land below sea level, with the deepest ices resting on submerged land.... OVER 8300 feet BELOW SEA LEVEL!

...deleted Holy Link...


Ozone holes are a natural phenomenon at the Earth's poles. They vary in size because of the variances in the upper air winds. The clouds that move around the prevalent high pressure area at the poles vary by that same thing. The ozone hole does not create or destroy clouds, and does not cause clouds to move.

While the temperature inversion of the stratosphere is caused by ozone production and destruction, it does not warm the Earth.


That was posted to your wife. She has a different opinion than you do.
03-02-2018 02:38
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5733)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Both poles are cold. Antarctica is a bit colder because of the dry nature of being land.
Antarctica average elevation is 8200 feet. That is the main reason that Antarctica is colder than the Arctic.
Cute Antarctic stats:
1) If all the ice were removed from Antarctica (& before rebound), average Antarctic elevation would be ~ 1200-1300 feet, broken up into an Antarctic archipelago.
2) The weight of ices depresses much Antarctic land below sea level, with the deepest ices resting on submerged land.... OVER 8300 feet BELOW SEA LEVEL!

...deleted Holy Link...


Ozone holes are a natural phenomenon at the Earth's poles. They vary in size because of the variances in the upper air winds. The clouds that move around the prevalent high pressure area at the poles vary by that same thing. The ozone hole does not create or destroy clouds, and does not cause clouds to move.

While the temperature inversion of the stratosphere is caused by ozone production and destruction, it does not warm the Earth.


That was posted to your wife. She has a different opinion than you do.


I'm not married to you.


The Parrot Killer
03-02-2018 03:16
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Both poles are cold. Antarctica is a bit colder because of the dry nature of being land.
Antarctica average elevation is 8200 feet. That is the main reason that Antarctica is colder than the Arctic.
Cute Antarctic stats:
1) If all the ice were removed from Antarctica (& before rebound), average Antarctic elevation would be ~ 1200-1300 feet, broken up into an Antarctic archipelago.
2) The weight of ices depresses much Antarctic land below sea level, with the deepest ices resting on submerged land.... OVER 8300 feet BELOW SEA LEVEL!

...deleted Holy Link...


Ozone holes are a natural phenomenon at the Earth's poles. They vary in size because of the variances in the upper air winds. The clouds that move around the prevalent high pressure area at the poles vary by that same thing. The ozone hole does not create or destroy clouds, and does not cause clouds to move.

While the temperature inversion of the stratosphere is caused by ozone production and destruction, it does not warm the Earth.


That was posted to your wife. She has a different opinion than you do.


I'm not married to you.


I like Into The Nite and litesong as opposites that supports each other like light and darkness.
Only a couple would come up with names like that. I think that's sweet. ;-)
03-02-2018 03:41
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5733)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Both poles are cold. Antarctica is a bit colder because of the dry nature of being land.
Antarctica average elevation is 8200 feet. That is the main reason that Antarctica is colder than the Arctic.
Cute Antarctic stats:
1) If all the ice were removed from Antarctica (& before rebound), average Antarctic elevation would be ~ 1200-1300 feet, broken up into an Antarctic archipelago.
2) The weight of ices depresses much Antarctic land below sea level, with the deepest ices resting on submerged land.... OVER 8300 feet BELOW SEA LEVEL!

...deleted Holy Link...


Ozone holes are a natural phenomenon at the Earth's poles. They vary in size because of the variances in the upper air winds. The clouds that move around the prevalent high pressure area at the poles vary by that same thing. The ozone hole does not create or destroy clouds, and does not cause clouds to move.

While the temperature inversion of the stratosphere is caused by ozone production and destruction, it does not warm the Earth.


That was posted to your wife. She has a different opinion than you do.


I'm not married to you.


I like Into The Nite and litesong as opposites that supports each other like light and darkness.
Only a couple would come up with names like that. I think that's sweet. ;-)

Not married to him either. I'm a guy. So is litebeer. I am not gay. I don't think litebeer is either. He lives a suburb near Everett. I live quite a bit south of there, closer to Seattle, but I pass through the Everett area regularly, often quite close to the community where litebeer once said he lives.

Your assumption is like the typical 'sock' argument. It's a weak redirection away from another subject at hand.

Now putting that aside, do you have a clear theory that you can propose for your experiment to test? Could you state it, please?


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 03-02-2018 03:42
03-02-2018 15:32
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Both poles are cold. Antarctica is a bit colder because of the dry nature of being land.
Antarctica average elevation is 8200 feet. That is the main reason that Antarctica is colder than the Arctic.
Cute Antarctic stats:
1) If all the ice were removed from Antarctica (& before rebound), average Antarctic elevation would be ~ 1200-1300 feet, broken up into an Antarctic archipelago.
2) The weight of ices depresses much Antarctic land below sea level, with the deepest ices resting on submerged land.... OVER 8300 feet BELOW SEA LEVEL!

...deleted Holy Link...


Ozone holes are a natural phenomenon at the Earth's poles. They vary in size because of the variances in the upper air winds. The clouds that move around the prevalent high pressure area at the poles vary by that same thing. The ozone hole does not create or destroy clouds, and does not cause clouds to move.

While the temperature inversion of the stratosphere is caused by ozone production and destruction, it does not warm the Earth.


That was posted to your wife. She has a different opinion than you do.


I'm not married to you.


I like Into The Nite and litesong as opposites that supports each other like light and darkness.
Only a couple would come up with names like that. I think that's sweet. ;-)

Not married to him either. I'm a guy. So is litebeer. I am not gay. I don't think litebeer is either. He lives a suburb near Everett. I live quite a bit south of there, closer to Seattle, but I pass through the Everett area regularly, often quite close to the community where litebeer once said he lives.

Your assumption is like the typical 'sock' argument. It's a weak redirection away from another subject at hand.

Now putting that aside, do you have a clear theory that you can propose for your experiment to test? Could you state it, please?


ITN,
It's not a "sock" argument. litesong isn't agressive which the men in here tend to be.
The experiment I am pursuing has been discussed in here. It's generally accepted that scientists haven't missed anything. So to rehash a contentious subject wouldn't be very productive.
03-02-2018 16:02
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
[b]James_ wrote:... litesong isn't agressive which the men in here tend to be.
Oh, James....But, I aggressively love to post that "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' stutterin' stutterin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time(plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" remains an old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' stutterin' stutterin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time(plus 1) threatener.
Not only is it accurate, many have contended that it is also poetic.... with certain structural strength. Even the recently appointed "stutterin' stutterin", tho not generally thought to display character of surety, in the reaction-swell of "stutterin' stutterin' many time(plus 1) threatener wake-me-up", has developed a positive "Lock of Repute".
Oh... & I am giddy wit' da excitement that ya include me in the raw "renk & oder" of MEN. So many (altho all be old sick silly sleepy AGW denier liar whiner NEUTERS) state that I am of the further away fair sex.
Edited on 03-02-2018 16:18
03-02-2018 16:46
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
litesong wrote:
[b]James_ wrote:... litesong isn't agressive which the men in here tend to be.
Oh, James....But, I aggressively love to post that "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' stutterin' stutterin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time(plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" remains an old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' stutterin' stutterin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time(plus 1) threatener.
Not only is it accurate, many have contended that it is also poetic.... with certain structural strength. Even the recently appointed "stutterin' stutterin", tho not generally thought to display character of surety, in the reaction-swell of "stutterin' stutterin' many time(plus 1) threatener wake-me-up", has developed a positive "Lock of Repute".
Oh... & I am giddy wit' da excitement that ya include me in the raw "renk & oder" of MEN. So many (altho all be old sick silly sleepy AGW denier liar whiner NEUTERS) state that I am of the further away fair sex.



;-)
03-02-2018 20:24
Wake
★★★★★
(3396)
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Both poles are cold. Antarctica is a bit colder because of the dry nature of being land.
Antarctica average elevation is 8200 feet. That is the main reason that Antarctica is colder than the Arctic.
Cute Antarctic stats:
1) If all the ice were removed from Antarctica (& before rebound), average Antarctic elevation would be ~ 1200-1300 feet, broken up into an Antarctic archipelago.
2) The weight of ices depresses much Antarctic land below sea level, with the deepest ices resting on submerged land.... OVER 8300 feet BELOW SEA LEVEL!

...deleted Holy Link...


Ozone holes are a natural phenomenon at the Earth's poles. They vary in size because of the variances in the upper air winds. The clouds that move around the prevalent high pressure area at the poles vary by that same thing. The ozone hole does not create or destroy clouds, and does not cause clouds to move.

While the temperature inversion of the stratosphere is caused by ozone production and destruction, it does not warm the Earth.


That was posted to your wife. She has a different opinion than you do.


I'm not married to you.


nightmare walks into a bar and says to the bartender, "give me ten shot glasses of bourbon all lined up in front of me."

He then proceeds to drink them down one right after the other. The bartender asks, "What is the occasion?"

nightmare answers, "I just had my first blow job."

The bartender says, "Congratulations, let me buy you one on the house."

nightmare says, "No thank you, if ten can't take the taste out of my mouth, another one won't".
03-02-2018 22:31
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5733)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Both poles are cold. Antarctica is a bit colder because of the dry nature of being land.
Antarctica average elevation is 8200 feet. That is the main reason that Antarctica is colder than the Arctic.
Cute Antarctic stats:
1) If all the ice were removed from Antarctica (& before rebound), average Antarctic elevation would be ~ 1200-1300 feet, broken up into an Antarctic archipelago.
2) The weight of ices depresses much Antarctic land below sea level, with the deepest ices resting on submerged land.... OVER 8300 feet BELOW SEA LEVEL!

...deleted Holy Link...


Ozone holes are a natural phenomenon at the Earth's poles. They vary in size because of the variances in the upper air winds. The clouds that move around the prevalent high pressure area at the poles vary by that same thing. The ozone hole does not create or destroy clouds, and does not cause clouds to move.

While the temperature inversion of the stratosphere is caused by ozone production and destruction, it does not warm the Earth.


That was posted to your wife. She has a different opinion than you do.


I'm not married to you.


I like Into The Nite and litesong as opposites that supports each other like light and darkness.
Only a couple would come up with names like that. I think that's sweet. ;-)

Not married to him either. I'm a guy. So is litebeer. I am not gay. I don't think litebeer is either. He lives a suburb near Everett. I live quite a bit south of there, closer to Seattle, but I pass through the Everett area regularly, often quite close to the community where litebeer once said he lives.

Your assumption is like the typical 'sock' argument. It's a weak redirection away from another subject at hand.

Now putting that aside, do you have a clear theory that you can propose for your experiment to test? Could you state it, please?


ITN,
It's not a "sock" argument.

It effectively is like one. We can just drop it here if you like. Such arguments are pretty useless.
James_ wrote:
litesong isn't agressive which the men in here tend to be.

Litebeer isn't aggressive?? You just try to change the course of THAT supertanker with a stuck helm. You just watch how aggressively he pursues his 'duty'.
James_ wrote:
The experiment I am pursuing has been discussed in here.

In rather vague ways. I am not interested in discussing the experiment itself at this point. I am discussing the theory you are basing your experiment upon. What is your theory?
James_ wrote:
It's generally accepted that scientists haven't missed anything. So to rehash a contentious subject wouldn't be very productive.

So your theory is that some theory of science is false?

To falsify a theory of science, you must show some conflicting evidence that causes that theory to be destroyed. Usually this results in the formation of another theory.

If you have no theory of your own, and you simply wish to falsify a theory, which one are you going after?


The Parrot Killer
03-02-2018 22:32
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5733)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: Both poles are cold. Antarctica is a bit colder because of the dry nature of being land.
Antarctica average elevation is 8200 feet. That is the main reason that Antarctica is colder than the Arctic.
Cute Antarctic stats:
1) If all the ice were removed from Antarctica (& before rebound), average Antarctic elevation would be ~ 1200-1300 feet, broken up into an Antarctic archipelago.
2) The weight of ices depresses much Antarctic land below sea level, with the deepest ices resting on submerged land.... OVER 8300 feet BELOW SEA LEVEL!

...deleted Holy Link...


Ozone holes are a natural phenomenon at the Earth's poles. They vary in size because of the variances in the upper air winds. The clouds that move around the prevalent high pressure area at the poles vary by that same thing. The ozone hole does not create or destroy clouds, and does not cause clouds to move.

While the temperature inversion of the stratosphere is caused by ozone production and destruction, it does not warm the Earth.


That was posted to your wife. She has a different opinion than you do.


I'm not married to you.


nightmare walks into a bar and says to the bartender, "give me ten shot glasses of bourbon all lined up in front of me."

He then proceeds to drink them down one right after the other. The bartender asks, "What is the occasion?"

nightmare answers, "I just had my first blow job."

The bartender says, "Congratulations, let me buy you one on the house."

nightmare says, "No thank you, if ten can't take the taste out of my mouth, another one won't".


Getting rather juvenile, aren't you Wake?


The Parrot Killer
03-02-2018 23:51
Wake
★★★★★
(3396)
Into the Night wrote: Getting rather juvenile, aren't you Wake?


A clear description of you isn't juvenile.
04-02-2018 17:45
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5733)
It is juvenile, Wake. I've only known four others that are this juvenile, and none of them are on this board.
04-02-2018 17:54
Wake
★★★★★
(3396)
Into the Night wrote:
It is juvenile, Wake. I've only known four others that are this juvenile, and none of them are on this board.


Looking in four mirrors doesn't constitute knowing four people.
04-02-2018 18:30
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
[b]litesong wrote: The weight of ices depresses much Antarctic land below sea level, with the deepest ices resting on submerged land.... OVER 8300 feet BELOW SEA LEVEL!
The ice on top of the submerged land 8300 feet below sea level is over 13,000 feet thick. If that ice totally was removed in that region, the rebound of the land might bring it to sea level & above.
08-02-2018 22:35
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
AGW is producing more snow, especially, at the Poles. As the less dense snow piles up on ice shelves, said shelves gain elevation. However, AGW is also causing directional changing & warming sea flows to increase melting of the much denser & heavier ice on the bottom of the shelves.


http://www.newsweek.com/antarctica-melting-below-and-getting-worse-773963
09-02-2018 02:24
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1042)
litesong wrote:
AGW is producing more snow,

How?
especially, at the Poles.

Why?
As the less dense snow

less dense than what?
snow piles up on ice shelves, said shelves gain elevation.

Uh huh.
However, AGW is also causing directional changing & warming sea flows

How?
to increase melting of the much denser & heavier ice on the bottom of the shelves.

water does tend to melt ice. Shouldn't the warmer waters be near the surface?

http://www.newsweek.com/antarctica-melting-below-and-getting-worse-773963

I read the article. It credits the....wait ...let me get this quote right...hang on...

could worsen from the natural climate phenomenon El Niño
09-02-2018 03:18
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' stutterin' stutterin' filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time(plus 1) threatener gazzzed & guzzzlin" gushed: How?... How?.... El Niño...
How now, brown cow. During El Niño, extra snow & extra melting can occur. However, El Niño doesn't acccount for decade after decade & century after century of warming.
How now, brown cow.
09-02-2018 04:57
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1042)
litesong wrote:
[quote] During El Niño, extra snow & extra melting can occur.

So La Nina is opposite, would the results be different? Would there be something "extra" in a La Nina?
Page 5 of 6<<<3456>





Join the debate East Antarctic Ice Shelf Weaknesses:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Brief history of ice ages, and how that might relate to our future12408-10-2018 21:50
Arctic ice hit one of its lowest points on record1105-10-2018 20:22
Ice sat 2 launches2228-09-2018 01:17
Antarctic ice melting faster than ever, studies show3218-06-2018 20:14
Headed For A New Ice Age? Latest Data Says Yes!1505-05-2018 01:44
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact